Ok so here's someone else who nearly amd eht einagural list but didn't.
George Lucas with more than just Star Wars to his name. He should probably get in on Star Wars alone but then you have to consider his other films, THX 1138 (Which spawned a soundsystem) and more importantly American Graffitti. AG was rites of passage movie that defined a generation before SW and gave us Ron Howard to the big screen from Happy Days and also a little known carpenter called Harrison Ford.
He also produced the Indiana Jones movies and created ILM (Industrial Lights and Magic). These all outweigh the downside to his CV including Willow (Which I actually liked) and Howard the Duck.
Feel free to agree or disagree but I think George Deserves his place.
I've never been much of a Star Wars-type, so I don't know the true genuis of Lucas. But he has also had a hand in making other great movies. I don't think so with him...
__________________
I am an MMA columnist for CPC Movies. Click on the banner to view this the current edition of my column.
Heroes is big over here but they keep focusing on the cheerleader girl rather than the show itself.
I grew up with Star Wars so it's difficult for me to understand who anyone could have not seen them over the past 30 years, but I've sort of wavered from Sci-Fi a little over the years. My dad on the other hand is a huge sci-fi fan and a huge Trekkie too. He's got Sci-fi stuff going way back that most of us here have probably never heard of.
Yeah. Like I said, Sci-fi is hit or miss for me. I fell in love with the Harry Potter series, but not until they made the movies and I saw the first one. Now, I'd have to say that it ranks only behind Lord of the Rings on my Sci-fi list.
Another movie that I really like is Pan's Labyrinth. Has anyone seen this movie? I'm surprised that it didn't really hit mainstream. It's a solid flick.
__________________
I am an MMA columnist for CPC Movies. Click on the banner to view this the current edition of my column.
By the way, do you recommend that I watch them in the order they were made (IV, V, VI, I, II, III), or in numerical order? I've always wondered about that...
__________________
I am an MMA columnist for CPC Movies. Click on the banner to view this the current edition of my column.
To be honest because I've only watched them in the release order, they make more sense that way to me. The "originals" actually ask more questions for the prequels to answer rather than the other way around. Plus, the different in the SFX quality between the first trilogy and the second is noticeable despite the touch ups to the older films.
I'd say watch them in release order : IV, V, VI then I, II, III.